I like it ... i didn't even look at it. All i looked at were the positions and I like it
:Boobs :Boobs :Boobs :Boobs :Boobs :Boobs

JAR

12-22-2008, 09:55 PM

Jorvorskie Lane :Beer

TallyStiller

12-22-2008, 09:59 PM

Even after watching our sorry excuse for an O line this year, I think 4 picks is a little excessive. Totally agree with Duke Robinson - FO loves to go best at position at a relatively weak position in the 1st... Timmons, Santonio, Heath, Troy P all fit that mold.

I think, though, that they take the rare foray into the realm of big time free agents to help solve our O line woes. I believe we make a serious run at Jordan Gross. We have almost $14 million in cap locked up in LT's this year - we could lock the position down with a guy who shines in both run and pass blocking while saving a few million over what this year's travesty is costing us. I see 2 of our 4 first day picks being O line, then one late. We need to draft secondary depth, at least one KEEPER D lineman, and somebody who doesn't scare the crap out of me to return punts... plus, I'd like to see us take another shot at a WR somewhere, hedging my bets on whether Stonio turns out to be a bust.

costanza2k1

12-23-2008, 01:19 AM

Jorvorskie Lane :Beer

Jar,

I'm going to borrow your gif and put it in my thread to bring it up at a later time....

steelz09

12-23-2008, 02:31 AM

I'd rather not take another guard in the 1st. I think we have enough guards on this team with:

If we resign Kemo and don't cut Simmons then would it be wise to draft another G? The only reason I would see that is if we let Hartwig go and Stapleton moves from G back to C but I don't see that happening next year. I know Duke is solid and probably better as a rookie then any of these guys but who knows.

I'd rather take a true LT because I really think that a top-tier rookie LT could come in and be better than Starks and Smith whom both should be let go. Hills and Essex will then compete for the starter/backup roles for both positions I would think RT/LT.

The only reason Starks is adequate is that he's so big it takes the defenders some time to run around him. There were several times last game where he barely laid a finger on the DE. He's played OK this season as a backup but I still feel he's exactly that... backup material.

It's hard to say because we don't know how the FO feels about the guys in there, and the backups behind them (in particular Hills, and Essex)

No rookie is likely to fix the OL problem particulary at the LT position. We have to be a big player for one of the free agent LTs or the problems will not go away. Maybe at rookie can step in at guard or RT but not LT unless he is a top 5 pick. I also agree that we have depth and options at Guard. I also assume that Washington is gone so getting a #4 WR (assuming Sweed becomes #3) needs to happen. IMO getting a KR in this draft is essential.

I'll be happy with the draft as long as the Steelers take (a competent) offensive tackle before the second round and a competent interior player (either G or C, preferably G) before the third round.

I'd like the other first day pick to have "lineman" in his title -- whether offensive or defensive. I'd like to see a possession WR/KR/PR in the third or fourth. Aside from that, throw in a fullback on the second day, and I really don't care what they do with the rest of the draft.

ramblinjim

12-23-2008, 01:15 PM

that draft would mean a lot of big uglies but we'll still have to deal with our LT problem (if Max isn't the guy). I'd love to see a draft of all linemen though. Just for fun. Especially if we can re-sign Bmac.

Oviedo

12-23-2008, 01:45 PM

Here is a potential riser on the DL from Nebraska: Ndamukong Suh (6'4", 305lbs)

Suh exploded on the scene this fall with a team-high 68 tackles, including 15 for loss and 5.5. sacks. Scouts love his size and athletic ability, which he put on display with two interception returns for touchdowns and a rushing touchdown as a fullback, and rumors are floating that Suh is headed for the draft.

He is also our solution it appears for all those who want a FB :wink:

NW Steeler

12-23-2008, 01:59 PM

I think that we need to sign one free agent Tackle to replace either Colon or Starks. Then draft one to replace the other. And a guard as well. Remember when our Oline was one of the best in the NFL? Seems like a long time ago.

If we resign Kemo and don't cut Simmons then would it be wise to draft another G? The only reason I would see that is if we let Hartwig go and Stapleton moves from G back to C but I don't see that happening next year. I know Duke is solid and probably better as a rookie then any of these guys but who knows.

I'd rather take a true LT because I really think that a top-tier rookie LT could come in and be better than Starks and Smith whom both should be let go. Hills and Essex will then compete for the starter/backup roles for both positions I would think RT/LT.

The only reason Starks is adequate is that he's so big it takes the defenders some time to run around him. There were several times last game where he barely laid a finger on the DE. He's played OK this season as a backup but I still feel he's exactly that... backup material.

It's hard to say because we don't know how the FO feels about the guys in there, and the backups behind them (in particular Hills, and Essex)

Problem is, there aren't any top tier tackles left by the time we draft... and as long as we keep winning, this will remain so. Hopefully, we sign a LT in free agency so that the lLACK of one doesn't put us in position TO draft one.

Chadman

12-27-2008, 09:07 PM

I'd rather not take another guard in the 1st. I think we have enough guards on this team with:

If we resign Kemo and don't cut Simmons then would it be wise to draft another G? The only reason I would see that is if we let Hartwig go and Stapleton moves from G back to C but I don't see that happening next year. I know Duke is solid and probably better as a rookie then any of these guys but who knows.

I'd rather take a true LT because I really think that a top-tier rookie LT could come in and be better than Starks and Smith whom both should be let go. Hills and Essex will then compete for the starter/backup roles for both positions I would think RT/LT.

The only reason Starks is adequate is that he's so big it takes the defenders some time to run around him. There were several times last game where he barely laid a finger on the DE. He's played OK this season as a backup but I still feel he's exactly that... backup material.

It's hard to say because we don't know how the FO feels about the guys in there, and the backups behind them (in particular Hills, and Essex)

Problem is, there aren't any top tier tackles left by the time we draft... and as long as we keep winning, this will remain so. Hopefully, we sign a LT in free agency so that the lLACK of one doesn't put us in position TO draft one.

Which is why the Steelers should focus on fixing the RT problem first & give Starks/Essex/Hills or a FA the shot at LT. The Steelers need to draft a 'potential' guy at LT and develop them the way they succeed every year.

mshifko

12-28-2008, 06:39 PM

get rid of colon, use him as a guard....draft a tackle...we need a legit left tackle, shift maxxy over to right tackle and go from there...

defensively, i'd draft a guy you can groom into a 3-4 defensive end...

steelz09

12-28-2008, 07:16 PM

I'd rather not take another guard in the 1st. I think we have enough guards on this team with:

If we resign Kemo and don't cut Simmons then would it be wise to draft another G? The only reason I would see that is if we let Hartwig go and Stapleton moves from G back to C but I don't see that happening next year. I know Duke is solid and probably better as a rookie then any of these guys but who knows.

I'd rather take a true LT because I really think that a top-tier rookie LT could come in and be better than Starks and Smith whom both should be let go. Hills and Essex will then compete for the starter/backup roles for both positions I would think RT/LT.

The only reason Starks is adequate is that he's so big it takes the defenders some time to run around him. There were several times last game where he barely laid a finger on the DE. He's played OK this season as a backup but I still feel he's exactly that... backup material.

It's hard to say because we don't know how the FO feels about the guys in there, and the backups behind them (in particular Hills, and Essex)

Problem is, there aren't any top tier tackles left by the time we draft... and as long as we keep winning, this will remain so. Hopefully, we sign a LT in free agency so that the lLACK of one doesn't put us in position TO draft one.

Which is why the Steelers should focus on fixing the RT problem first & give Starks/Essex/Hills or a FA the shot at LT. The Steelers need to draft a 'potential' guy at LT and develop them the way they succeed every year.

I think this year we may have a shot at a top tier tackle. Last year, 5 tackles were taken right around our pick. Are these same teams interested in a tackle this year? Most likely not. Are the "other" teams ahead of us interested in a tackle? Possibly, but not nearly as bad as us. Obviously a few will be taken before us but I feel we'll have a good shot at a solid LT prospect this year. Also, I remember Colbert & Co saying that this years draft will have just as many tackles if not more than last year which is definitely good for us! :)

RuthlessBurgher

12-30-2008, 11:24 AM

I'd rather not take another guard in the 1st. I think we have enough guards on this team with:

If we resign Kemo and don't cut Simmons then would it be wise to draft another G? The only reason I would see that is if we let Hartwig go and Stapleton moves from G back to C but I don't see that happening next year. I know Duke is solid and probably better as a rookie then any of these guys but who knows.

I'd rather take a true LT because I really think that a top-tier rookie LT could come in and be better than Starks and Smith whom both should be let go. Hills and Essex will then compete for the starter/backup roles for both positions I would think RT/LT.

The only reason Starks is adequate is that he's so big it takes the defenders some time to run around him. There were several times last game where he barely laid a finger on the DE. He's played OK this season as a backup but I still feel he's exactly that... backup material.

It's hard to say because we don't know how the FO feels about the guys in there, and the backups behind them (in particular Hills, and Essex)

Problem is, there aren't any top tier tackles left by the time we draft... and as long as we keep winning, this will remain so. Hopefully, we sign a LT in free agency so that the lLACK of one doesn't put us in position TO draft one.

Which is why the Steelers should focus on fixing the RT problem first & give Starks/Essex/Hills or a FA the shot at LT. The Steelers need to draft a 'potential' guy at LT and develop them the way they succeed every year.

I think this year we may have a shot at a top tier tackle. Last year, 5 tackles were taken right around our pick. Are these same teams interested in a tackle this year? Most likely not. Are the "other" teams ahead of us interested in a tackle? Possibly, but not nearly as bad as us. Obviously a few will be taken before us but I feel we'll have a good shot at a solid LT prospect this year. Also, I remember Colbert & Co saying that this years draft will have just as many tackles if not more than last year which is definitely good for us! :)

Well, the elite tackles (Alabama's Andre Smith, Ole Miss' Michael Oher, and Virginia's Eugene Monroe) will almost assuredly be gone in the top half of the first round. Picking in the latter stages of Round 1, you would be looking at the next tier of tackles such as LSU's Ciron Black or Baylor's Jason Smith (and both of them might be gone by the time we pick in the late first as well), so we might have to consider the top ranked guard (Oklahoma's Duke Robinson) or the top ranked center (Cal's Alex Mack) instead of a tackle in round one.